I trust or find Patel Patriot to be 1000 times more credible than JS.
One of the thing that irks me about the whole "LoW - one year" thing is that there seems to be a whole lot of assertions and conclusions being made without any clear evidence, quotes or factual backup (from anons or elsewhere), which feels like the opposite of Patel Patriot, who points always to evidence, quotes, facts and then draws some conclusions, but always contextualizes or qualifies them. (So far, anyway)
I also follow Patel. I find it interesting that he seemed to come out of nowhere and has this deep understanding of Devolution. And he still distances himself from Q. I wouldn't be surprised if he was put here by the White Hats.
Thanks for your reply. I also don't trust Juan O'Savin but I'll listen to the interview.
Yeah. Me too. Meanwhile (I haven't listened to this yet, but: )
https://rumble.com/vsyhvd-patel-patriot-devolution-power-hour-11922.html
also
https://rumble.com/vsz5ev-patel-patriot-interviews-iet17-on-the-low-manual-and-more.html
I trust or find Patel Patriot to be 1000 times more credible than JS.
One of the thing that irks me about the whole "LoW - one year" thing is that there seems to be a whole lot of assertions and conclusions being made without any clear evidence, quotes or factual backup (from anons or elsewhere), which feels like the opposite of Patel Patriot, who points always to evidence, quotes, facts and then draws some conclusions, but always contextualizes or qualifies them. (So far, anyway)
I also follow Patel. I find it interesting that he seemed to come out of nowhere and has this deep understanding of Devolution. And he still distances himself from Q. I wouldn't be surprised if he was put here by the White Hats.